City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)

[gh_mcfc]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

PSG Fans (as expected are a bit pissed off)

<a class="postlink" href="http://forum.psg.fr/showthread.php?p=4445576" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://forum.psg.fr/showthread.php?p=4445576</a>

<a class="postlink" href="https://www.facebook.com/supporterscontrelefairplayfinancier/timeline" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">https://www.facebook.com/supporterscont ... r/timeline</a>


From what I understand they will be looking to Join (add names) to the case currently going through the courts on the basis that FFP has a direct affect on football consumers in terms of price of tickets and subscriptions and also on the basis it kills the dreams of fans. As such the it is the EUs duty to protect consumers . This will be a powerful argument as I understand it. I also have information that other fans from other countries will be adding there names to the case. I will update if I get more info.

I posted this earlier in the thread

Just for a bit of mischief I mailed the European Commision asking them if I could register a complaint about the effect of FFP on me as a fan I got this email in reply



Dear ....

Thank you for your email of 22 May 2014 whereby you raised concerns about the effects of UEFA Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations on yourself as a supporter of a club competing in UEFA competitions. In your view due to the FFP, clubs need to maximize their income and this leads to high prices for supporters.

EU competition law prohibits, among others, collusion between market operators (Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; "TFEU") and abuses of a dominant position (Article 102 of the TFEU) where trade between EU Member States may be appreciably affected.

On the basis of the information provided in your e-mail, the issue you raised does not seem to fall under EU competition laws but it rather seems to be a consumer protection issue. Therefore you might want to contact the consumer protection agency in your country.

For the avoidance of doubt, it should be stated that we regard your information as market information rather than as a formal complaint which would have to comply with certain legal requirements as set out in Article 5 of Commission Regulation No. 773/2004.

We appreciate that you have chosen to inform us of this issue and we have taken note of your concerns.

Yours sincerely,
Ágnes Szarka
Case Handler


European Commission
DG COMPETITION
Unit C-2

MADO 28/08
B-1049 Brussels/Belgium
+32 2 29 53 164
agnes.szarka@ec.europa.eu
Competition websites: <a class="postlink" href="http://ec.europa.eu/competition" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://ec.europa.eu/competition</a>
DISCLAIMER
"The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission."

I have spoken to Jean-Louis Dupont on this matter several times now and he is adamant that any fans or fan group joining his case will only strengthen it. It a pretty straight forward process and if totally cost and risk free . I am currently debating with myself whether to do this or not. However it ideally should be fans of several UK clubs . If I decided to take this forward it basically has be done this week. I have a qpr fan interested also so we shall see. Basically 4 or 5 fans minimum will need to complete a proforma and as many more as possible like a face book page or similar to show support. Its all pretty simple.

 

[John.des]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Was thinking about the incomes, last time it was 270m for 2012-2013.

There were rumours about it being around 320m for 13-14. Would add up easily apart from one small fact, the income we got from New York club, Melbourne club etc, so the around 40-50m pounds from partner groups.

From 270m to 320 its easy to see what makes it, 35m extra PL money, 5m rise in CL money, about 5m rise in matchday incomes hopefully. And some smaller sponsors that came to the club around 2013 summer , maybe that Indonesian Coke company, and some Chinese Noodle company or something like that.:)

I can see around 50m extra incomes compared to last year in all of these. Of course the less known sponsors could be paying us anything as we have not even rumours about how much they pay apart from Etihad an Nike where at least we know some numbers.

But what about the 40-50m that was included in 12-13 incomes in the 270m figure that was coming from partner clubs for image right and IP things. Was that a one off or can we expect it again? It wont count for FFP probably but will Mansour still money to us trough the other City branded clubs?

If that really was a one off for 12-13 accounts then I dont see how we go over 300m pounds income for 13-14 of what we cant do anything right now as that period is over of course just have to wiat for the numbers until December probably.

So it would be good to know that our last time 270m income is a basic points where every extra incomes we earned will be added to that in 13-14, or that 270m is really going back to around 220-230m and the extra incomes will add to this amount for 13-14...
The difference could that those incomes form partner clubs were a one off to try to get around FFP (as it looked like to me the whole time) or its something we will do for different amounts in the future too.

Maybe others know more about accounting, incomes etc could answer this.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Was thinking about the incomes, last time it was 270m for 2012-2013.

There were rumours about it being around 320m for 13-14. Would add up easily apart from one small fact, the income we got from New York club, Melbourne club etc, so the around 40-50m pounds from partner groups.

From 270m to 320 its easy to see what makes it, 35m extra PL money, 5m rise in CL money, about 5m rise in matchday incomes hopefully. And some smaller sponsors that came to the club around 2013 summer , maybe that Indonesian Coke company, and some Chinese Noodle company or something like that.:)

I can see around 50m extra incomes compared to last year in all of these. Of course the less known sponsors could be paying us anything as we have not even rumours about how much they pay apart from Etihad an Nike where at least we know some numbers.

But what about the 40-50m that was included in 12-13 incomes in the 270m figure that was coming from partner clubs for image right and IP things. Was that a one off or can we expect it again? It wont count for FFP probably but will Mansour still money to us trough the other City branded clubs?

If that really was a one off for 12-13 accounts then I dont see how we go over 300m pounds income for 13-14 of what we cant do anything right now as that period is over of course just have to wiat for the numbers until December probably.

So it would be good to know that our last time 270m income is a basic points where every extra incomes we earned will be added to that in 13-14, or that 270m is really going back to around 220-230m and the extra incomes will add to this amount for 13-14...
The difference could that those incomes form partner clubs were a one off to try to get around FFP (as it looked like to me the whole time) or its something we will do for different amounts in the future too.

Maybe others know more about accounting, incomes etc could answer this.

The answer is that the £270m did not include the payments for image rights. This was normal operating income (media, commercial & matchday) and should be in the range of £325-330m this last year. Our total income was therefore around £315m in 2012/13.

 

[I'm no cynic but...]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

PSG Fans (as expected are a bit pissed off)

<a class="postlink" href="http://forum.psg.fr/showthread.php?p=4445576" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://forum.psg.fr/showthread.php?p=4445576</a>

<a class="postlink" href="https://www.facebook.com/supporterscontrelefairplayfinancier/timeline" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">https://www.facebook.com/supporterscont ... r/timeline</a>


From what I understand they will be looking to Join (add names) to the case currently going through the courts on the basis that FFP has a direct affect on football consumers in terms of price of tickets and subscriptions and also on the basis it kills the dreams of fans. As such the it is the EUs duty to protect consumers . This will be a powerful argument as I understand it. I also have information that other fans from other countries will be adding there names to the case. I will update if I get more info.

I posted this earlier in the thread

Just for a bit of mischief I mailed the European Commision asking them if I could register a complaint about the effect of FFP on me as a fan I got this email in reply



Dear ....

Thank you for your email of 22 May 2014 whereby you raised concerns about the effects of UEFA Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations on yourself as a supporter of a club competing in UEFA competitions. In your view due to the FFP, clubs need to maximize their income and this leads to high prices for supporters.

EU competition law prohibits, among others, collusion between market operators (Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; "TFEU") and abuses of a dominant position (Article 102 of the TFEU) where trade between EU Member States may be appreciably affected.

On the basis of the information provided in your e-mail, the issue you raised does not seem to fall under EU competition laws but it rather seems to be a consumer protection issue. Therefore you might want to contact the consumer protection agency in your country.

For the avoidance of doubt, it should be stated that we regard your information as market information rather than as a formal complaint which would have to comply with certain legal requirements as set out in Article 5 of Commission Regulation No. 773/2004.

We appreciate that you have chosen to inform us of this issue and we have taken note of your concerns.

Yours sincerely,
Ágnes Szarka
Case Handler


European Commission
DG COMPETITION
Unit C-2

MADO 28/08
B-1049 Brussels/Belgium
+32 2 29 53 164
agnes.szarka@ec.europa.eu
Competition websites: <a class="postlink" href="http://ec.europa.eu/competition" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://ec.europa.eu/competition</a>
DISCLAIMER
"The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission."

The reply to your email appears a wordy way of saying "Don't call us, we'll call you."

 

[MCFC-alan88]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

That's very cynical.

 

[SilverFox2]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I expect that any planning City made for this forth coming season didn't account for -

YAYA throwing a strop and maybe wanting to leave - requires significant spend to replace him
Negredo wanting to leave ( can probably replace him with the money received )

Unfortunately it seems that Agents have a vested interest in churning their assets.

According to the CIES Database the average 'stay' of footballers is about 3 years in UK during the 2012/13 season which is a little more than in other countries.
The drop down menus on the tabs need to be changed to show the correct statistics.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.football-observatory.com/Indicators" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.football-observatory.com/Indicators</a>

Most certainly our owners will be aware of this and will make contingency plans for all players not just the ones who are high profile.

 

[fbloke]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Its very smart of City to move players on to new contracts with much lower basic payments and very large incentives for success.

They began that process of course before UEFA conceded that bonus payments would be excluded from the FFP calcs so I wonder who decided that ;-)

 

[oppa gangnam style]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Can bonuses be based only on winning/reaching stuff like finishing at least top4, winning title, reaching knockout stages of CL reaching semis of it etc?

What about the signing of fee tho, how it works, and when did it turn into "loyalty fee", wasnt it earlier a one lump sum at signing a contract but these days it seems different like players get it on top of their wages maybe even in a weekly scale...

Or do they only get it when they leave/contract runs out as they were loyal until then?

Btw last time in 12-13 our whole wage list was 230m pounds. What do you expect for 13-14 accounts? FFP says it cant be more than 230m right? It probably wont as new players came in last summer were said to be on not horror wages while some players probably were like Tevez, Balo etc.
Also Mancini pay off was a big amount surely.

What is the expectation tho compared to 230m? As the 12-13 season wasnt really succesful no bonuses were paid out probably, but in 13-14 we won 2 trophies and reached CL knock out stages for the first time that maybe activated some bonuses for some players too.

 

[SilverFox2]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Its very smart of City to move players on to new contracts with much lower basic payments and very large incentives for success.

They began that process of course before UEFA conceded that bonus payments would be excluded from the FFP calcs so I wonder who decided that ;-)

Is the reasoning (for City) that payment for bonus's can only occur after success (ie next years accounts) and for UEFA the difficulty this would present in applying FFP to a particular season ?

 

[George Hannah]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Its very smart of City to move players on to new contracts with much lower basic payments and very large incentives for success.

They began that process of course before UEFA conceded that bonus payments would be excluded from the FFP calcs so I wonder who decided that ;-)

Is the reasoning (for City) that payment for bonus's can only occur after success (ie next years accounts) and for UEFA the difficulty this would present in applying FFP to a particular season ?

I also think UEFA have different plans for our future success

 

[Marvin]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Its very smart of City to move players on to new contracts with much lower basic payments and very large incentives for success.

They began that process of course before UEFA conceded that bonus payments would be excluded from the FFP calcs so I wonder who decided that ;-)

The UEFA settlement agreement states

Manchester City accepts that employee benefit expenses cannot be increased during the next two financial periods (2015 & 2016). If Manchester City meets the annual break-even requirements outlined above, this spending limit will be removed for the 2016 financial period.

So when you say UEFA have excluded bonus payments are you referring to the general rule FFP rules for all clubs, or City's settlement agreement?

 

[Damanino]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Well logic would say we can go lower than 230m pounds for wages/year if Txiki already done a few tricks on contracts, also the bye bye money to Mancini and staff should lower it as that was paid out in 12-13 accounts, Yet I think we could be on similar level to last time, so I feel it will be between 220-240m pounds.
If our incomes tho reaches 300m than wages to incomes ratio is 75% what is pretty good while Uefa advice is to be at around 60-70%, 75% would be great for us as it was lot worse ratio last few years.

Interesting thing is I expect rival teams all come closer to us in wages.

 

[HelloCity]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Its very smart of City to move players on to new contracts with much lower basic payments and very large incentives for success.

They began that process of course before UEFA conceded that bonus payments would be excluded from the FFP calcs so I wonder who decided that ;-)

The UEFA settlement agreement states

Manchester City accepts that employee benefit expenses cannot be increased during the next two financial periods (2015 & 2016). If Manchester City meets the annual break-even requirements outlined above, this spending limit will be removed for the 2016 financial period.

So when you say UEFA have excluded bonus payments are you referring to the general rule FFP rules for all clubs, or City's settlement agreement?

He's referring to this:

"- The wage bill of the whole club (playing and non-playing staff) for 2014-15 will need to remain at the same level as that of 2013-14 season. It is important to note that additional bonuses for performances can be paid outside this number. Importantly, in reality, the existing MCFC business plan sees a natural decline in that wage bill."

With regards to the settlement, we can pay whatever bonus payments we want on top of our annual wage bill.

Obviously outside of the settlement, this would be the same.

 

[SilverFox2]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

I'm not a lawyer but is the vagueness of the statement deliberate or accidental ?

Literally, 'keeping full wage bill the same' means no reduction as well as no increase.
Bonus payments for 'performance' has a similar ambiguity regarding both good and not so good performances.

 

[Centurions]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Well logic would say we can go lower than 230m pounds for wages/year if Txiki already done a few tricks on contracts, also the bye bye money to Mancini and staff should lower it as that was paid out in 12-13 accounts, Yet I think we could be on similar level to last time, so I feel it will be between 220-240m pounds.
If our incomes tho reaches 300m than wages to incomes ratio is 75% what is pretty good while Uefa advice is to be at around 60-70%, 75% would be great for us as it was lot worse ratio last few years.

Interesting thing is I expect rival teams all come closer to us in wages.

"we can go lower than 230m pounds for wages/year if Txiki already done a few tricks on contracts", if you mean the Barca style lower basic but higher performance bonuses then yes Txiki has "done a few tricks".
"bye bye money to Mancini and staff should lower it", correct.
"Yet I think we could be on similar level to last time", ???

How can you argue (correctly) that the wages will be lower and then come to the conclusion that'll it be the same?

Arsenal's , Chelsea's & the rags(especially) will definitely be higher, the dippers depends on if they spend the Suarez money.

 

[Marvin]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Its very smart of City to move players on to new contracts with much lower basic payments and very large incentives for success.

They began that process of course before UEFA conceded that bonus payments would be excluded from the FFP calcs so I wonder who decided that ;-)

The UEFA settlement agreement states

Manchester City accepts that employee benefit expenses cannot be increased during the next two financial periods (2015 & 2016). If Manchester City meets the annual break-even requirements outlined above, this spending limit will be removed for the 2016 financial period.

So when you say UEFA have excluded bonus payments are you referring to the general rule FFP rules for all clubs, or City's settlement agreement?

He's referring to this:

"- The wage bill of the whole club (playing and non-playing staff) for 2014-15 will need to remain at the same level as that of 2013-14 season. It is important to note that additional bonuses for performances can be paid outside this number. Importantly, in reality, the existing MCFC business plan sees a natural decline in that wage bill."

With regards to the settlement, we can pay whatever bonus payments we want on top of our annual wage bill.

Obviously outside of the settlement, this would be the same.

Thanks.

It's a good job City have done the business on and off the pitch. I am sure we are way ahead of where the owners thought we would and should be, If we weren't we'd be really cursing FFP. We might have needed to spend millions this Summer, and imagine if we'd done a Spurs and not made the top 4. Was entirely possible after changing manager

 

[Damanino]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

Well logic would say we can go lower than 230m pounds for wages/year if Txiki already done a few tricks on contracts, also the bye bye money to Mancini and staff should lower it as that was paid out in 12-13 accounts, Yet I think we could be on similar level to last time, so I feel it will be between 220-240m pounds.
If our incomes tho reaches 300m than wages to incomes ratio is 75% what is pretty good while Uefa advice is to be at around 60-70%, 75% would be great for us as it was lot worse ratio last few years.

Interesting thing is I expect rival teams all come closer to us in wages.

"we can go lower than 230m pounds for wages/year if Txiki already done a few tricks on contracts", if you mean the Barca style lower basic but higher performance bonuses then yes Txiki has "done a few tricks".
"bye bye money to Mancini and staff should lower it", correct.
"Yet I think we could be on similar level to last time", ???

How can you argue (correctly) that the wages will be lower and then come to the conclusion that'll it be the same?

Arsenal's , Chelsea's & the rags(especially) will definitely be higher, the dippers depends on if they spend the Suarez money.

On the same I mean +/- 5% change. This whole lower basic wage idea probably needs a few years to really kick in and most of first teams players have it. In 13-14 accounts that cant have a huge effect maybe later on yes.
Also bonuses will count a lot maybe.

 

[George Hannah]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

It's a good job City have done the business on and off the pitch. I am sure we are way ahead of where the owners thought we would and should be, If we weren't we'd be really cursing FFP. We might have needed to spend millions this Summer, and imagine if we'd done a Spurs and not made the top 4. Was entirely possible after changing manager

I think we are really cursing FFP actually and with very good reason.
This year was the big one. The year when the new TV deal money came in and all our friends have been waiting for it with us nailed to the floor.
They can't contain themselves.

 

[kinkysdribble]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

It's a good job City have done the business on and off the pitch. I am sure we are way ahead of where the owners thought we would and should be, If we weren't we'd be really cursing FFP. We might have needed to spend millions this Summer, and imagine if we'd done a Spurs and not made the top 4. Was entirely possible after changing manager

I think we are really cursing FFP actually and with very good reason.
This year was the big one. The year when the new TV deal money came in and all our friends have been waiting for it with us nailed to the floor.
They can't contain themselves.

I didn't think it would affect us to much, but when you see our premier rivals spunking money left right and centre and we're in no position to challenge for any of these high end players, well it as allowed clubs to steal a march on us. I know we probably only needed a minor tweek here and there, but we would have been in the market for some of these players had these FFP restrictions not been in place.

 

[der bomber28]

Re: City & FFP (continued)

It's a good job City have done the business on and off the pitch. I am sure we are way ahead of where the owners thought we would and should be, If we weren't we'd be really cursing FFP. We might have needed to spend millions this Summer, and imagine if we'd done a Spurs and not made the top 4. Was entirely possible after changing manager

I think we are really cursing FFP actually and with very good reason.
This year was the big one. The year when the new TV deal money came in and all our friends have been waiting for it with us nailed to the floor.
They can't contain themselves.

Been thinking this myself, it seems they couldn't wait to throw the shackles round us. Whilst everyone else has free reign to spunk as much money as possible, but it was never brought in, to keep the status quo was it? Even when we had legitimate sponsorship, questions were asked, yet the swamp dwellers, who IMO definitely have some dodgy deals on the go. Go unchallenged, and the likes of them, Chelsea, Arsenal and Psg. Are like the only people, at an all you can eat buffet. I still don't understand how FIFA, think this rule is sustainable. After all, how can you get away in essence. With telling the owner of a business, how much they can or can't invest. It feckin stinks to high heaven to me, and I hope if they come it again next season, we take them to the cleaners. More holes than Swiss cheese, and I'm far from business savvy. Let's hope regardless of their spending, we blow those clinging to Fifa's nut sack, away again next season. Feck you Platini.